One of the very few tech companies who have refused to bend the knee to the United States' current dictatorial government.
Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
11–20 of 145 posts
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#12Very strange writing from semafor.com
>For instance, an agency could pay for a subscription or negotiate a pay-per-use contract with an AI provider, only to find out that it is prohibited from using the AI model in certain ways, limiting its value.
This is of course quite false. They of course know the restriction when they sign the contract.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#13[flagged]
[flagged]
Especially one where, realistically, the banana in chief might be put back in his box (crate?) sometime next year. Like, his approval rating is now actually _lower_ than at the same time in his first term, and in his first term the midterms didn't exactly go great for him.
It's particularly awkward to be in the position of having to complement the emperor on his new clothes when the emperor has a limited shelf life.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#14[flagged]
What would be an example of such criminal charges being brought by this administration? Is there a case that stands out as clear retaliation? Edited to add: I can think of the mortgage fraud cases being discussed/brought against some high-profile people, but can’t think of any corporate world leadership being charged.
I wasn't thinking of this administration necessarily. There's been cases going back to IIRC the early 00s, for instance Joseph Nacchio.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#15Gosh, I guess the SaaS distribution model might give companies undesirable control over how their software can be used. Viva local-first software!
In general I applaud this attitude but I am glad they are saying no to doing surveillance.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#16Gosh, I guess the SaaS distribution model might give companies undesirable control over how their software can be used. Viva local-first software!
EULAs can impose limitations on how you use on-premises software. Sure, you can ignore the EULA, but you can also do so on SaaS, to an extent.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#17Gosh, I guess the SaaS distribution model might give companies undesirable control over how their software can be used. Viva local-first software!
In general I applaud this attitude but I am glad they are saying no to doing surveillance.
Me too, actually, but this is some "leopards ate their face" schaudenfraude that I'm appreciating for the moment.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#18One of the very few tech companies who have refused to bend the knee to the United States' current dictatorial government.
It's startling how few are willing to. I'm rooting for them.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#19Gosh, I guess the SaaS distribution model might give companies undesirable control over how their software can be used. Viva local-first software!
EULAs can impose limitations on how you use on-premises software. Sure, you can ignore the EULA, but you can also do so on SaaS, to an extent.
Are EULAs even enforceable? SaaS at least have the right to terminate service at will.
Re: Anthropic irks White House with limits on models’ use
#20Gosh, I guess the SaaS distribution model might give companies undesirable control over how their software can be used. Viva local-first software!
EULAs can impose limitations on how you use on-premises software. Sure, you can ignore the EULA, but you can also do so on SaaS, to an extent.
With SaaS, you can be monitored and banned at any moment. With EULAs, at worse you can be banned from updates, and in reality, you probably won't get caught at all.